Current Usage and Proliferation of Library 2.0 from User Viewpoint: Focusing on Folksonomy

The development of IT (information technology) has brought about many types of new services, and the traditional sectors such as libraries and information management fields have actively applied new technology to improve the quality of their services. Many of these newly developed services are described under the term ‘Web 2.0’, in the sense they are next-generation forms of services, and this coinage is duplicated in the term ‘Library 2.0’, specifically referring to the library services equipped with Web 2.0 technology. Active acceptance of advanced IT to library services is very important to enhance the value and role of library in this rapidly changing information environment. So far, libraries in Korea and abroad have already been putting a lot of efforts and resources to develop and provide technically advanced services. Despite these efforts, it is found that some of these new services have failed to attract users’ attention and interest, resulting in the low rates of usage. This study, therefore, reviews current state of the “Folksonomy” based services provided in Korean college libraries as a type of Library 2.0 services, and assess their usage rates. The result of this evaluation is then used to develop a guideline to improve and mobilize the use of such services. 키워드: 웹 2.0, 도서관 2.0, 폭소노미, 태그, 태그 클라우드 Web 2.0, Library 2.0, Folksonomy, Tag, Tag Cloud

[1]  Margaret E. I. Kipp,et al.  Tagging Practices on Research Oriented Social Bookmarking Sites , 2013 .

[2]  Sunshine J Carter,et al.  How to Build a Desk Statistics Tracker in Less than an Hour Using Forms in Google Docs. , 2011 .

[3]  John V. Richardson,et al.  Adoption of Web 2.0 in US academic libraries: a survey of ARL library websites , 2011, Program.

[4]  Zeth Lietzau,et al.  U.S. Public Libraries and Web Technologies: What's Happening Now?. , 2011 .

[5]  Sharon Q. Yang,et al.  Next generation or current generation?: A study of the OPACs of 260 academic libraries in the USA and Canada , 2011, Libr. Hi Tech.

[6]  Nicoletta Corrocher,et al.  The adoption of Web 2.0 services: An empirical investigation , 2011 .

[7]  Xiaohua Hu,et al.  User tags versus expert-assigned subject terms: A comparison of LibraryThing tags and Library of Congress Subject Headings , 2010, J. Inf. Sci..

[8]  R. Procter,et al.  Adoption and use of Web 2.0 in scholarly communications , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[9]  June Abbas,et al.  Adoption of Library 2.0 Functionalities by Academic Libraries and Users: A Knowledge Management Perspective , 2010 .

[10]  Carla S. Redden,et al.  Social Bookmarking in Academic Libraries: Trends and Applications , 2010 .

[11]  Tim O'Reilly,et al.  What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software , 2007 .

[12]  Peter J. Rolla User Tags versus Subject Headings: Can User-Supplied Data Improve Subject Access to Library Collections? , 2009 .

[13]  Nicole Mitchell,et al.  Library 2.0: A guide to participatory library service , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[14]  Louise F. Spiteri,et al.  The Use of Folksonomies in Public Library Catalogues , 2006 .

[15]  Bernardo A. Huberman,et al.  Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems , 2006, J. Inf. Sci..

[16]  Jia Mi,et al.  Library 2.0 or Library III : returning to leadership , 2011 .

[17]  Diana Gosálvez Prados,et al.  Six ways to make Web 2.0 work , 2009 .